"…Associated Press reports that the positions were set out in a new document on the Eucharist that details abuses of the sacrament and the need for better instruction to ensure it remains sacred. The 85-page text is the working draft of a final document that will be developed during the October global synod of bishops in Rome.

The paper covers a range of issues related to the Eucharist:** It suggests, for example, that Latin be used during international liturgical gatherings so all priests involved can understand the proceedings, and it suggests that parishes consider using more Gregorian chants to prevent more “profane” types of music from being played.**

It calls for priests not to be “showmen” who draw attention to themselves and says lay people can have an important but “minimal” presence in Masses. It says the tabernacle - which holds the bread and wine held by Catholics to be the body and blood of Christ - should have a prominent place in the church and not be shunted off to a corner.

In a preparatory document released yesterday for October’s Synod on the Eucharist,** the Vatican singled out divorcees who remarry and Catholic politicians who support abortion,** in criticising the faithful who continue to receive Holy Communion while in a state of mortal sin.

I’m sorry to say it sounds like the same old, same old. Same problems, same attitudes, same solutions. Wake me up if they do something significant. :yawn:

Do a better job of screening the sheep who come to the feeding trough, and use them as examples to others who would dare approach the table wrongly, seems to be the standard mantra.

Why do they think so few Catholics attend church? Could it be they have never been weaned off spiritual baby food? We praise the saints for their external observable behavior, but hear very little about the apophatic tradition of the Church, which has been locked up primarily in cloisters, but which without a Catholic is only halfway formed – like a mind without a heart.

Since Vatican II confirmed that holiness is for everyone including the laity, it should now be OK for the Church to start teaching children about mysticism to complement and make real dogma and liturgy.

I was particularly bothered when I saw focus on voting for pro-choice candidates. When I was elected as a conservative Republican, let me assure you that just being pro-life does not make a candidate a good one, nor does the candidate’s claim to be pro-life necessarily result in any tangible action on behalf of aborted babies. I’ve hung around these people. I also hung around many democrats for some time because I worked on a task force appointed by the Wichita City Council to investigate racism in city contracting practices. Boy, talk about judging by its cover; you should have seen how twisted words can get when people want to collect data and use it to justify foregone conclusions. In politics, you just don’t know.

Many good Catholics were forbidden by their conscience to vote for Bush because of the war, and for Kerry because of pro-life stance, but voted for one of them anyway. Others voted for “pure” third party candidates which is an act of faith, but produces no fruit in terms of saving babies. I was actually concerned that more Catholics would take the “staunch” position, thus diverting Bush votes and allowing a Kerry win. I honestly think the Church should not publicly endorse or denounce any candidates, although I have no problem with them teaching on Church views on political behavior.

Also keep in mind that this constant drive for the Church to dictate political policy is really a concession that the government has powers the Church wishes she had, that is to be able to compel compliance, using deadly force if necessary. Maybe if she spent more time teaching feeding her sheep some substantial spiritual side dishes to complement the Eucharist, people would see the Church really does know how to lay out a full meal and be compelled to come to her rather than go off to eastern or Hollywood religions looking for something other than dogma and rote behavior modification.

By the way, last night I wrote an email to the Holy Father about this. The kataphatic tradition of the Church is like ground school, and the apophatic tradition is like flying lessons. Each part makes the other part more meaningful. Too many Catholics have only heard of kataphatic teachings – which is like taking nothing but ground school, and thinking one can fly because we have the technical knowledge how its “supposed” to work.

Which is more dangerous? Flying with a “pilot” who knows all about ground school but never flew, or flying with a pilot who knows nothing about the weather patterns, FAA regulations, instruments, or controls but has learned a little “seat of the pants” flying? One has a feel for it, the other has the technical background. You need both dogmatic and mystical theology before either half of it makes any sense.

For what it’s worth, I sent an email to the Holy Father on this topic last night – the topic of getting mysticism into the mainstream. Vatican II confirmed that it was proper for the Church to bring holiness to everyone, even laity and those active religious.

[quote=Franze]Interesting reflexions Alan, we have to know why we make several things, what do you propose?
[/quote]

We are focused on classifying sin and admonishing the sinner. That is one work of mercy.

When it comes to the point of blaming sinners for the Church’s ills, that is a denial of the faith, as they have no power over the Church. They only have power over the egos of the leadership, who must take on the sins of their crew in humility and mercy.

My dad once worked for a boss who took personal credit for everything right in his department, but when something went wrong he singled out the employee that did it, and told his bosses he was not at fault, but his employee was.

This is how I see it. If the herd is beginning to scatter, blame the sheep. In fact, if they stray, yell “good riddance” as they go out the door, then rejoice that they are gone because those who are left are Higher Quality sheep. This is spiritual cleansing by pruning. Problem is, it is at best a logically relativistic exercise or you’ll wind up with a vine and no branches!

Of course they take it personally when things aren’t perfect under their watch. It is their livelihood. Problem is, a diocesan priest recently confided to me that they are usually tasked with so much administrative work that they end up compromising on their prayer lives, and when that happens it is terrible because who wants a priest without a good prayer life?

First, I’d expand the permanant deaconate. Hopefully our seemingly wonderful new bishop Michael Jackel will revive this in our diocese since bishop Gerber didn’t believe in them and bishop Olmstead was not here long enough and when he was here he was pretty busy with our third diocesan Synod. This will allow some of the workload to be taken off the priests so they can regain their prayer lives.

Second, I’d spread the Good News far and wide that we don’t have to go to other faiths to find the transformational teachings that we crave. This is the subject of the mail I wrote to the Holy Father. Catholics have a hunger for a deeper spirituality than dogma, liturgical splendor, and intellectual satisfaction. We hunger for true spirituality, which can come only with a proportional focus on mystical theology to balance the dogmatic. The saints knew this well. Vatican II says we can all have holiness – in essence what it takes to become saints as I read it.

Let’s get contemplative prayer out of the cloisters and into the lives of every Catholic, as the Catechism suggests.

After that, I’m not sure what to do. If we do nothing other than advance deeper prayer forms, then I believe the fruits will begin to become obvious even to the worst cynic, and all Catholics will come to realize that the Catholic Church has everything we need in spirituality, and it’s all available at the parish level.

Once we get some “heart exercises” under our belts, we will look at each other in a different way, and eventually become the beacon of unity and love without all these thorns choking us and giving us a bad appearance.

I’m afraid if we just keep getting louder and more adamant about what is and what isn’t a sin, we’ll continue to languish in effectiveness. At this point you’d think the Church leaders would realize that more of that isn’t likely to work.

Quite frankly, if a person has a gun because he wants to coerce me or rob me for personal gain, I don’t feel as threatened as if someone has the gun for reasons of a Higher Authority. When we hire out the government to do the “dirty work” that the Church cannot do in terms of instilling morality, we are mixing messages by combining love with deadly force.

It’s like a sticker I saw on a gas pump the other day. It references a law against drive-aways, and then concludes, “Either do the right thing and pay for your gas … or go to jail”

Oh, either I Do The Right Thing or you will hurt me. You have denied me the opportunity to act in faith, and with the mixed message I may never even know myself whether I Did the Right Thing because I wanted to or because I was afraid of men and temporal punishment.

That’s the difference between Church and State. The Church says, “come, we love you,” and the state says, “keep in line or we’ll hurt you.” When Church and state get into each others’ business, we get those messages coincident and frankly turns people into mindless sheep, bleating about because they are mixed up in their heads.

Archbishop Nikola Eterovic, secretary of the synod, said that the document reflects a more than 90 percent response rate from the 113 bishops’ conferences, 11 synods of Eastern Catholic churches, 25 dicasteries of the Roman Curia and the Union of Superiors General (the main umbrella group of male religious). In general, the document seems concerned to promote a proper celebration of the Eucharistic rites, without much additional gloss or improvisation.

**Eterovic said few respondents expressed much enthusiasm for a return to the pre-Vatican II “Tridentine” Mass.

“The overwhelming majority of responses affirmed the liturgical reforms, noting the great contribution they have made to the life of the church,” Eterovic said. “There is no turning back.”**

“At the same time,” he said," some worry about excessive verbosity in the Mass. There is a desire to let the rites speak for themselves. The people of God know the language of symbols."

[quote=AlanFromWichita]I’m sorry to say it sounds like the same old, same old. Same problems, same attitudes, same solutions. Wake me up if they do something significant. :yawn:

[/quote]

I think Pope Benedict has been clear in the past he would like to see a “reform of the reform.” Ever since he confirmed the synod shortly after his election I have had hopes that he would use this synod as a first step. Remember, this is just the working papers for the synod, so it will necessarily be vague. On CWNews.com they noted that the Holy Father has kept his October calendar clear for this event. Maybe I am too optimistic, but I think many concrete steps towards better liturgies, and improved appreciation for the Eucharist will come from this synod. Better Catholic spirituality amongst the faithful will naturally flow from improvements in those two areas.

[quote=amantoan]I think Pope Benedict has been clear in the past he would like to see a “reform of the reform.” Ever since he confirmed the synod shortly after his election I have had hopes that he would use this synod as a first step. Remember, this is just the working papers for the synod, so it will necessarily be vague. On CWNews.com they noted that the Holy Father has kept his October calendar clear for this event. Maybe I am too optimistic, but I think many concrete steps towards better liturgies, and improved appreciation for the Eucharist will come from this synod. Better Catholic spirituality amongst the faithful will naturally flow from improvements in those two areas.
[/quote]

I think you have posted some astute thoughts – the longest journey begins with the first step and the pope is obviously taking initial steps to get together with his fellow bishops who will have to implement these things in their dioceses, listen to their view of things, understand some of the problems in the various nation churches as regards these issues and come to some “common thinking”.

It seems to me that when done, those attending the synod will be clear on what the Holy Father wants and expects, and he will have a better notion of what cooperation and implementation can be handled for the church universal. The Church needs and wants I believe to speak with “one voice” and talking things over is one of the initial ways to get that done.